Poll on planned war conditions

[iamthey]

Poll on the issue raised in [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=89693]thread[/url].

As neither GM agrees, and it seems to be fairly controversial we'll just hold a poll.

Basically if there is a planned war, or a partially planned war with pre-established conditions, like a timescale, are participants who enter the conflict after the original participants to be bound to those conditions? This will not apply retroactively, but will define things form this point forward.

Edited August 6, 2010 by iamthey

[Uberstein]

It's called respect.

[Voodoo Nova]

I would say yes, in respect to the war and those that enter that war. However, if a new war is declared separately on the person involved in a specific timeline war, I believe that should be between the participants of the new war in regards to the timeline for their war.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Voodoo Nova

[Justinian the Mighty]

Time is a tool of the evil capitalist pigs to make you think that Elvis is really dead.

[Sargun II]

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1281065990' post='2402362']
I would say yes, in respect to the war and those that enter that war. However, if a new war is declared separately on the person involved in a specific timeline war, I believe that should be between the participants of the new war in regards to the timeline for their war.
[/quote]

I hope someone tries to do that to me, I'll abuse the huge loopholes in your suggestion so hard...

[Triyun]

I vote no, the purpose of war in my view is destroying one's opponent utterly. Time is merely one front on which to defeat them.

[Botha]

[color="#000080"]It boils down to mutual respect between everyone involved.[/color]

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1281079976' post='2402535']
I vote no, the purpose of war in my view is destroying one's opponent utterly. Time is merely one front on which to defeat them.
[/quote]

War, IC or OOC? The issue of time is an issue of OOC respect for RP rules governing an IC war. Is the purpose of war in CNRP complete disrespect of the other person OOC too? For all the lofty claims of IC/OOC difference, this sentiment exposes its hollowness if IC war is paralleled to an OOC feud with disrespect to ones antagonists.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

I vote no, because by imposing such a rule it would restrict the RP of others, forcing them to put on hold actions that they are not officially bound by.

You must not only respect the RP of the war itself, but also the rp of those who would and want to intervene.

Anything else is akin to CNRP slot filling.

Planned wars should always be done on the understanding they may escalate based on the actions of others. This is how I conducted the planned war with HYADD since we knew we wanted a planned war with only limited interference, we chose a time line based on the political plausibility of our desired outcomes. In other words, we waited for a period when it seemed like few people except those we wanted would intervene and politely asked others out of character and in if they would refrain from intervention.

That said, if you truly plan a war, you need to plan it more than just between yourselves, but yourselves and any others you may have concerns with taking unwanted actions.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Captain Enema]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1281094317' post='2402611']
I vote no, because my daddy voted no as well. See daddy/triyun!!! I'm a good boy!
[/quote]


I think I like this version better.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

I follow Triyun's instructions IC because it is my will to do so. OOC I express my own thoughts as I see fit, thank you very much. That is all I will say on this matter.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Maelstrom Vortex

[HHAYD]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1281094317' post='2402611']
Planned wars should always be done on the understanding they may escalate based on the actions of others. This is how I conducted the planned war with HYADD since we knew we wanted a planned war with only limited interference, we chose a time line based on the political plausibility of our desired outcomes. In other words, we waited for a period when it seemed like few people except those we wanted would intervene and politely asked others out of character and in if they would refrain from intervention.
[/quote]
Ironically, there were mobs of people DoWing on me and CAN refused to help me when I was expecting they would. I folded to avoid being annihilated. I was expecting a few enemies and support for me, not a stampede of haters and no help. I knew it wasn't going to turn out well when spy attempts became blotched.

As for the planned war conditions, if someone wants to join, politely ask them to be realistic with the movements. Most of the time they will be realistic, or at least try.

Edited August 6, 2010 by HHAYD

[Captain Enema]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1281095471' post='2402619']
I follow Triyun's instructions IC because it is my will to do so. OOC I express my own thoughts as I see fit, thank you very much. That is all I will say on this matter.
[/quote]


Convenient, very convenient answer.

[Zoot Zoot]

I voted yes because it boils down to mutual respect at the end of the day.
If somebody joins a war, such as the Current Euro !@#$storm, regardless of your own timelines, if your participating in THAT thread, you follow that timeline.

However, you could just use a different CB, make a seperate war thread and fight your war in that manner to suit your own time limit. But I dont think even the more douchy members of this community would drop so low to get their war.

As I said, its mutual respect thats important, and that is what should count more.

Just my two cents, if you have an issue with it, PM me.

[Centurius]

I vote yes.

If you're joining a war against someone who rp's slower you adapt if you like it or not.

I don't see the issue anyway to be honest.

Someone deploys forces on the 16th and they take 12 days to transfer. Fine rp them arriving at the same day but it wont happen ic'ly before the 28th.

[Il Terra Di Agea]

Voted Yes,

Nobody forced the outside people to join, they wanted to. If you are going to join an RP, you should be willing to continue the RP as the initial members did. If you want to join a war, be willing to follow the war as it has gone by before your entry. If you are going to toss RP out the window, and just want to be a $@! and crush someone, RP a terrorist attack or something, don't interfere with an RP that is not your own, and that you are not willing to see to fruition.


Also, to Mael's point about restricting the RP of others: Not really, they are joining an RP, and are not being forced away, the only restriction is "Don't be a douche, follow our rules or go away."

Edited August 6, 2010 by Il Terra Di Agea

[Executive Minister]

I voted yes. Whether anyone likes it or not, CNRP has its own distinct, yet quite muddled 'timeline' or continuity. If someone decides to send troops to aid a combatant in a planned war in a way that is contrary to that war's timeline they are screwing up that timeline's continuity. For too long have I seen people move massive amounts of troops in record time, sometimes reaching entirely different continents before initial battles have even finished between the original combatants! It makes no sense at all, and while some say that being forced to follow a planned war they did not agree to but must respond IC'ly to forces them to RP something they don't want, the same can be said in reverse. While you are getting instant satisfaction by godmodding your forces to battle, you are messing up a perfectly good RP with your impatience. This was the reason I stopped reading HOI, which started off to be such a promising and well RPed war in its infant stages. Honestly, there should have been a disclaimer or something for people to enter... what a terrible waste.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Triyun]

[quote name='king of cochin' timestamp='1281080863' post='2402547']
War, IC or OOC? The issue of time is an issue of OOC respect for RP rules governing an IC war. Is the purpose of war in CNRP complete disrespect of the other person OOC too? For all the lofty claims of IC/OOC difference, this sentiment exposes its hollowness if IC war is paralleled to an OOC feud with disrespect to ones antagonists.
[/quote]


[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1281094891' post='2402615']
I think I like this version better.
[/quote]

I wondered how many people would actually take what I posted seriously

My honest opinion on the issue is that timing is fine, but if you are going to impose an artificial time scale outside of the default one, then you will need to do a lot of other RPs, such as amassing troops at the border, stockpiling ammunition, etc and having your troops advance at realistic conditions, which while an extremely fast thing for say the open deserts of Mesopatamia for a armor division, would be quite a bit slower elsewhere. All and all my fear is that one creates a law which allows the offensive side no restriction on prepatory movement, but does not extend the same courtesy for the defensive side.

I would be more comfortable with the type of time scale used in the current European War if extensive pre-war planning was made, and the tell tale signs of a pending invasion could be discerned from counter intel, particularly through satint and presumably informants one had on the other side of the border. This is of course speaking to allied borders such as the one France and Germany supposedly had.

[Sal Paradise]

[quote name='Botha' timestamp='1281080260' post='2402537']
[color="#000080"]It boils down to mutual respect between everyone involved.[/color]
[/quote]

So why did you vote no?

You're throwing off my confirmation bias here.

[iamthey]

[quote name='Sal Paradise' timestamp='1281124384' post='2402975']
So why did you vote no?

You're throwing off my confirmation bias here.
[/quote]

If it boils down to mutual respect then there is no reason for there to be another OOC rule that Rpers can argue about and beat each other over the head with.

Edited August 6, 2010 by iamthey

[Yawoo]

Voted yes.

[Michael McBride]

Voted yes. As others have said, if you choose to get involved in someone else's pre-planned war, then you're joining their RP. If you're joining someone else's RP, you play by their rules. No one is forcing you to join. Don't like their rules/timescale, don't join, it's as simple as that.

I'm not really seeing what all the controversy is about. We had two GMs agree with the vast majority of the RP community and IAT chooses to make an issue out of it and then it's a "controversial issue"? Not seeing it here.

[iamthey]

[quote name='Pravus Ingruo' timestamp='1281144716' post='2403326']
I'm not really seeing what all the controversy is about. We had two GMs agree with the vast majority of the RP community and IAT chooses to make an issue out of it and then it's a "controversial issue"? Not seeing it here.
[/quote]

It was more because this wasn't actually something prescribed within the rules. While the majority of those talking were in favor that was still a minority of the total community, so a poll to make this official was in order. Clearly the community supports the position, so that is what we will go by in the future.

[SpacingOutMan]

I vote yes. That is all.

[Captain Enema]

[quote name='iamthey' timestamp='1281146482' post='2403343']
It was more because this wasn't actually something prescribed within the rules. While the majority of those talking were in favor that was still a minority of the total community, so a poll to make this official was in order. Clearly the community supports the position, so that is what we will go by in the future.
[/quote]

Hopefully we'll be seeing more on the spy rolls being used as part of an rp rather than the RP if this is the mentality.